Dna Peoples Legal Services Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
860207220
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Window Rock, AZ, USA
Phone
9288714151
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$11,846,558
Expenses
$7,215,685
Assets
$9,598,537
Liabilities
$5,444,012

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RODOLFO D SANCHEZ (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • LAVERNE H GARNENEZ (PRESIDENT)
  • VIRJINYA TORREZ (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • RODOLFO D SANCHEZ (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $206,789 total reported compensation
  • OTIS PERKINS (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $143,806 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

See schedule o

What it reported doing in 2024

Dna - peoples legal services provides free legal services and community legal education to persons living in poverty on the navajo, hopi, and jicarilla apache reservations, and in parts of northern Arizona, northwest New Mexico, and southern Utah. Dnas main office, as well as dnas fort defiance branch office, are located in window rock, Arizona. Dna also has branch offices in chinle Arizona, tuba city Arizona, flagstaff Arizona, keams canyon Arizona, and farmington New Mexico. Our office in keams canyon, designated as our hopi office, provides civil and criminal defense legal services to members of the hopi and to others primarily living on the hopi reservation.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 64
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 65
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 49%; rating input score 49
  • Program expense ratio: 79.9%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $143.4 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 39.1%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.33; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.57; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.9%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.1% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 49% of revenue deployed · 79.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $207K · 19 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 49/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 46/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 24/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 52/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.